Prince Albert II of Monaco Current Events - Part 28 (Sep. 2009 - August 2010)

[MyAdia]

It seems that Albert’s New York based-attorney filed the appropriate response to Eringer’s lawsuit and called this case for what it is, but he also asserts Albert’s entitlement to diplomatic immunity (which Eringer must have known that he would).

Stanley S. Arkin, Counsel for H.S.H. Prince Albert II of Monaco, Files Motion to Dismiss Meritless Complaint of Robert Eringer; Declares Eringer's Lawsuit "a Crude 'Shake Down' or Blatant Extortion"

NEW YORK and MALIBU, Calif., Nov. 10 /PRNewswire/ -- Stanley S. Arkin, legal counsel for Prince Albert II of Monaco ("Prince Albert"), today filed in federal court in California a motion on Prince Albert's behalf calling for the court to dismiss the meritless lawsuit of Robert Eringer. By filing this lawsuit, Eringer is attempting to misuse the U.S. judicial system to extract undeserved monies from Prince Albert.

Mr. Arkin stated, "Simply put, Robert Eringer, like his attempted lawsuit, is not credible. In fact, he dresses up his complaint with pages upon pages of unrelated and seemingly bizarre anecdotes which have nothing to do with his so-called claim. Basically, Eringer's lawsuit couches a modest breach-of-contract claim in a complaint replete with grandiose, scurrilous and largely irrelevant allegations, redolent of a crude 'shake-down' or blatant extortion."
…

Here’s a link to the entire press release. If you read it, you’ll noticed that Arkin does not use any of the bold wording that Albert’s French-based attorney, Lacoste, used concerning the veracity of each of Eringer’s claims and about suing for defamation of character. They really do not have to, more importantly they should not address the veracity of each of Eringer’s claim. As I mentioned before, Eringer’s 100-plus claims of work performed are irrelevant to what he is suing for. The lawsuit is a clear case of extortion. Arkin even mentions a September 2009 letter that where Eringer demands money to not file the suit. Hopefully, someone will scan a copy of the entire motion and place it online to be read. I wonder if Eringer’s attorney will place a link to this motion on his blog as he did to Eringer’s complaint.

It’s good that Albert is standing up to this extortionist. I just hope that he starts standing up to others.

Originally Posted by Glistening Seas

hmm the link didn't download for me! So the only things i read were the 3 articles. As far as the video it was some other poster whom said it might not be real? but even if it is my only point is that since PA is single and as a rule a single individual varied sex life isn't considered news and since it was long ago imho isn't going to be holding anyone's interest as news.

Here's the link again to Eringer's complaint. You will need Adobe Reader to actually read it. Here's a link to download the latest version of Adobe Reader for free.

Forget the video. If a video does exist, I don't think the video will hurt Albert in the long-term since most people do not see him as a sexually pure saint. The more damaging items in the lawsuit are the many references to the people in and out of Monaco that Eringer investigated supposedly at Albert's request. I believe that one's perspective (if you currently believe that everything in it is false) about this case will change if you actually read the lawsuit - well if you want it to change. Also, I feel that people will walk away with a deeper understanding about Albert's commitment to ridding Monaco of corruption. I would love to see Albert stand up to the principles and promises that he made in his July 12, 2005 Investiture speech, "I intend however that ethics remain the backdrop for all the actions of the Monegasque authorities. Ethics are not divisible. Money and virtue must be combined permanently. The importance of Monaco's financial market will require extreme vigilance to avoid the development of the type of financial activities which are not welcome in our country." But, he cannot do this as long as he gives people the power to extort him.

[Bones]

I would second that. I may have missed some pertinent information but I cannot understand why the case was brought in the United States. What did they think would happen? Even if the case went to trial and even if Prince Albert were found guilty they could not very well carry out sentence on him as he is a foreign head of state and beyond their jurisdiction. Is that correct? Even if the whole thing were true I don't see how anything violates U.S. law being done in Monaco between two foreign nationals and with one of them being the law in the one country and beyond the law in the other. Again, I may be missing something but...

**On a prior point, I think Rainier III will be remembered as one of the greatest monarchs in Monegasque history and I think he could be a bad**s at times; when it was necessary. This is not part of Albert's character but he may be learning even now that sometimes the leader of a country has to be a bit of a bad**s at times.

[Renata4711]

I can't see PA as a victim of anyone or anything.

From the day when Rainier clad his little son in his first uniform, Albert has been learning about his future job from his father. He has had 50+ years to acquire the knowledge, tenacity and "savoir-faire" needed for the job of Sovereign Head of State.

He will also have watched at close hand the inevitable intrigues, machinations etc. that are normal in a government or royal/princely court.

When he took over after his father's death, many people would likely have seen this as an opportunity to exploit PA, thinking he was easy to deceive or influence.

I believe he is a rational person who knows who and what he is, and who has a rational view of his talents, achievements and failings.

This current debacle will soon be yesterday's (or yesteryear's) news.

[Bones]

I don't think I understand. Being a victim of someone is not a character flaw or a personal failing -it just means someone has attacked you in some way. Albert II is either the victim of this man or he's guilty of all he is accused of and a pretty horrible person -I don't see any other options. I havn't heard anyone say that Albert doesn't know "who and what he is" but he seems to have a problem knowing who and what a number of other people are. Maybe this will be the event that makes the difference. I would think that after all of the experiences of his family he wouldn't be quite so trusting but there also are and have been alot of good people who always see the best in others and cannot, because of their own character, recognize bad guys (or gals) when they see them.

[Glistening Seas]

Given the pre-historic condition of my computer dowinloading the link may be unmanageable!. however, reading what little we have it appears what Mr. Eringer is doing is claiming that Mr. Eringer wants 'hush-money' in exchange for Eringers silence about whom PA had wanted investigated. totally lacking in good taste imho

[sandsla]

Originally Posted by Bones

I would second that. I may have missed some pertinent information but I cannot understand why the case was brought in the United States. What did they think would happen? Even if the case went to trial and even if Prince Albert were found guilty they could not very well carry out sentence on him as he is a foreign head of state and beyond their jurisdiction. Is that correct? Even if the whole thing were true I don't see how anything violates U.S. law being done in Monaco between two foreign nationals and with one of them being the law in the one country and beyond the law in the other. Again, I may be missing something but...

**On a prior point, I think Rainier III will be remembered as one of the greatest monarchs in Monegasque history and I think he could be a bad**s at times; when it was necessary. This is not part of Albert's character but he may be learning even now that sometimes the leader of a country has to be a bit of a bad**s at times.

I couldn't agree with you more here Bones and my posts regarding Albert and Rainier were only in reply to pasts posts brought up by others here regarding Rainier and Albert's style, possible relationship, and Rainier's responses to Albert's personal relationships, etc.... As far as the current case is concerned from the first time I read about it I didn't give it much weight because it seemed it was brought forth for no other reason than to embarrass Albert or to take some some kind of revenge?

Originally Posted by Renata4711

I can't see PA as a victim of anyone or anything.

From the day when Rainier clad his little son in his first uniform, Albert has been learning about his future job from his father. He has had 50+ years to acquire the knowledge, tenacity and "savoir-faire" needed for the job of Sovereign Head of State.

He will also have watched at close hand the inevitable intrigues, machinations etc. that are normal in a government or royal/princely court.

When he took over after his father's death, many people would likely have seen this as an opportunity to exploit PA, thinking he was easy to deceive or influence.

I believe he is a rational person who knows who and what he is, and who has a rational view of his talents, achievements and failings.

This current debacle will soon be yesterday's (or yesteryear's) news.

Renata, I agree with you too, I think power struggles like this always happen when there are new guys in charge and Rainier also had his share of problems with people testing him. I also think Rainier trained Albert well, even if he naturally has a more trusting nature of some people. I guess it is a good thing he is learning now first hand about the kind of people he will have to navigate in his path early in is reign, both in his professional and personal life. Better sooner than later.

[Bones]

Yes, that's why, as things stand now, I'm most inclined to view this as some sort of a publicity stunt by a media hound more than anything else. I cannot see how he could realistically have expected to win or get anything out of it other than notoriety and 15 minutes of fame.

[MyAdia]

Here’s the link (28-page pdf file) to the actual motion that Albert’s lawyer, Stanley Arkin, filed on Nov 10, 2009. The primary basis for having the lawsuit dismissed is stated in the opening paragraph: “By virtue of his position as Monaco's sovereign and head-of-state, His Serene Highness Prince Albert II of Monaco ("Defendant" or "H.S.H. Prince Albert II of Monaco" or "Prince Albert") is immune from the jurisdiction of courts in the United States. Notwithstanding that fact, Plaintiff has filed this meritless lawsuit, which couches a modest breach of contract claim in a Complaint replete with grandiose, scurrilous and largely irrelevant allegations, redolent of a crude "shake-down" or blatant extortion.” Also, here's the link to Eringer's lawyer's response to Albert's motion to dismiss.


I’ve only skimmed through the motion, but thus far I haven’t come across the words that Lacoste was using in the public – basically stating that mostly everything in Eringer’s lawsuit was false and make-believe. As I earlier, that was a stupid position to take for this breach of contract lawsuit. Arkin does note this: “Unless otherwise indicated, all of the "facts" discussed in this motion are taken from Plaintiffs Complaint (the "Complaint" or "CompL."). For the limited purpose of this motion, Plaintiffs assertions are assumed to be true, but Defendant reserves the right to challenge any of Plaintiffs assertions when appropriate to do so. See, e.g., Blaxland v. Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, 323 F.3d 1198, 1201 (9th Cir. 2003) (assuming facts alleged in complaint to be true in reviewing a motion to dismiss based on sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act).”

Here is a summary of the arguments that Arkin cites why Eringer’s Complaint should be dismissed.
1. Plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed or stayed because Defendant is shielded by head-of-state immunity.
2. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: In 1976, Congress enacted the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA"), which codified the Tate Letter's theory of restrictive immunity and provided a "comprehensive statute containing a ‘set of legal standards governing claims of immunity in every civil action against a foreign sovereign, or its political subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities.’”
3.Personal Jurisdiction” An additional, independent ground for dismissal is that this Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Defendant.

In addition to arguing why Eringer’s Complaint should be dismissed, Arkin asks the Court: “Separate and apart from this Court's determination of Defendants Motion to Dismiss, and so long as the Complaint in this case is under the Court's consideration, Defendant also moves to strike from the Complaint the voluminous immaterial, impertinent, and scandalous matter pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f).” Arkin lists 2 main reasons why the above should be done:
A. The Legal Standard: Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) allows a court to "strike from a pleading. . . any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter."
B. Issues To Be Decided: As to Plaintiffs breach of contract claim, the questions to be decided center on the terms of the parties' purported agreement, Plaintiffs performance of his contractual obligations during the first quarter of 2008 (the three months for which payment is in dispute), and Defendant's alleged failure to make payment for that quarter…Allegations relating to Plaintiffs "investigations" and Defendant's personal activities have no place in this Complaint. These allegations appear to have been included solely to elicit media interest, to cast a "derogatory light" on Defendant, and to create extortive pressure on Prince Albert; they should therefore be stricken.”

Arkin concludes his Motion with the following: WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant his motions to dismiss the Complaint and to strike immaterial matter.

I'll bet anything that once Eringer's Complaint is dismissed and all the non-relevant material is stuck, Lacoste will say it was because that all of it was untrue; Albert’s apologizers will say the same; Albert will continue living his life he same - indulging himself while others cover his back; corrupters will continue to use his indulgences against him; and Albert will continue to display his private life in the public to demonstrate that everything is fine in fairy tale world - and Monaco will suffer in the long run.

[Renata4711]

You're right in saying that PA will probably "get away with it". He is fortunate to be the Sovereign Prince, and, as far as I know, the Regency Council cannot take away his immunity from prosecution. (Please correct me if I'm wrong).

Compare his status with other Heads of State, particularly the President of Italy, Silvio Berlusconi, whose immunity was taken away by the Constitutional court.
He will have to stand trial - unless he'll find a loophole.....

Members of royal or princely families will have an in-built advantage, although Prince Laurent of Belgium had some problems....

[iceflower]

Today, November 22, Prince Albert attended the final of the
annual "No finish line" event in Monaco, he even participated
himself and gave a little speech afterwards, in the link you
can find a video of that.


** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 ** belga **

** Video link **


In the evening another sports event has taken place

Prince Albert II of Monaco during the Iaaf World Athletics Gala at
the Sporting Club on November 22, 2009 in Monaco.


** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** gettyimages ** zimbio **

[iceflower]

Albert has been to Germany today!


Prince Albert of Monaco recieves the BAUM special award in the
city hall in Hamburg, Germany, November 23, 2009.

It's a prize for people that are involved in environment themes.


** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** ppe gallery ** gettyimages **

[DuedePhiladelphia]

Originally Posted by iceflower

Albert has been to Germany today!


Prince Albert of Monaco recieves the BAUM special award in the
city hall in Hamburg, Germany, November 23, 2009.

It's a prize for people that are involved in environment themes.


** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** ppe gallery ** gettyimages **

Wow, talk about traveling does HSH have a private Lear jet at his disposal

[Nathalie Cox]

He must have a private Lear Jet, otherwise I don't know how he manages to go to one country to another in no time.
He is looking good in the last pics

[iceflower]

Originally Posted by DuedePhiladelphia

Wow, talk about traveling does HSH have a private Lear jet at his disposal

He owns one for sure! Whenever there are airport pics of
him, we can see a plane with his emblem.

In his speech today Albert praised Germany for it's pioneering role in
climate change: "In everything I do with my foundation, I know that
I can count on Germany and its government with Mrs Merkel," he said
"We are facing a new era that challenges us to develop a new kind
of lifestyle. I am sure that especially Germany will accept this challenge."

Here's an additional article in German and a picture gallery :

** Article ** Gallery **

[Bones]

Has Robert Eringer visited anyone else's Monaco blog? Even with all of the heavy duties of being a writer, secret agent man and legal foe of Prince Albert he still seems to find time to make comments on Monaco-related blogs that are of the opinion he's a media hound; an impression not helped by his own new blog "Monaco Intelligence" wherein he basically calls Albert II a big, fat, liar liar pants on fire. I wondered if this comment on my struggling little blog was part of some e-carpet bombing campaign on his part. Anyway, it certainly doesn't make me take him any more seriously as someone with a legitimate complaint rather than someone trying to have their 15 minutes by tossing around the dirty laundry of a celeb.

[Renata4711]

Thanks, Bones.
I've read the Monaco Inteligence blog. This thing will run and run, I fear.
What is really sad is that they're trying to involve poor Charlene in all this:
"The snowballing scandal prompted France's influential Le Nouvel Observateur magazine to wonder if Prince Albert, 51,....Might attempt to deflect attention from the Eringer affair by marrying his South African maitresse en titre, Charlene Wittstock....
R.E.'s email: eringer33@aol.com

PS I've just trawled through the archive of Le Nouvel Obs, and there's nothing about the lawsuit.

[Bones]

All of which only reaffirms my original impression that this whole thing is nothing so much a bid for attention and publicity. He seems willing to put out all this stuff on his blog, leave comments on any others that mention him, bring up all the stuff about Albert's private life, even dragging Charlene into it, none of which has anything at all to do with his disputed employment contract but seems to me just more and more evidence that he never had any real hope of actually winning his case but is just trying to throw around enough scandalous gossip to make his name well known and get his picture in the papers.

[Moonmaiden23]

He seems to have slimmed down...again! Prince Albert looks good right now.

[Renata4711]

Bones, I think you're right about the lawsuit just being a red herring.

Worse than that, the general opinion on the web seems to be that Robert Eringer is a fictional character, a sort of Walter Mitty who has been everywhere and has done everything.

Looking back to the court papers, they don't look very businesslike, more like something from a very small banana republic without PCs or competent typists.

Let's hope - once people have had their fun, - that PA, CW, the family and Monaco can get on with the business in hand.

[iceflower]

Prince Albert II of Monaco, Rama Yade, French Secretary of State
for Sport and Joel Bouzou, president and founder of Peace and Sport,
pose as they arrive at the Opening Ceremony of the Peace and Sport
International Forum on November 25, 2009 in Monaco



** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 ** belga **